The Jacksonville Landing's Redevelopment Plan

[Overstreet]

Remodeling the landing is repeating history.................that didn't work.

In 1985 the mood, driven by a developer,  was that the Landing would incite people to come downtown. It would revitalize downtown.

In 2014 they are once again saying and thinking that the Landing would revitalize down town.  I agree it isn't the Landing that's broke it is the downtown.

[jcjohnpaint]

I don't mind the idea of the plan, I just think the present designs sucks.  It looks like a prison.  I think much can be done to better modify the plan forwarded, but I'm not totally against the concept.  Hell, if anything, downtown could use more people. 

[Ocklawaha]

The proposed layout allows this great view to anyone along Laura street, all the way to the First Baptist Church.

Yes, that's right. People from all over the world flock to Jacksonville to see the iconic First Baptist Church. Who needs the Statue of Liberty or the Golden Gate Bridge or even the Hollywood sign, when you can come see the First Baptist Church?

This might come as a shock to many of you but I'm pretty certain that Stephendare can back me up on this. People do come from all over the world to go to First Baptist Church. Fact is, not a Sunday goes by without small groups, tours, students etc. from all around the planet go into FBC as it is one of the leading churches in the Baptist faith. 45Th in size.

7   Potential Church   Fort Lauderdale   FL   12,382
16   Christ Fellowship Baptist Church   Palmetto Bay   FL   8,197
24   Church by the Glades   Coral Springs   FL   6,712
29   Idlewild Baptist Church   Lutz   FL   6,150
30   First Baptist Church of Orlando   Orlando   FL   5,690
44   The Crossing Church   Tampa   FL   4,613
45   First Baptist Church of Jacksonville   Jacksonville   FL   4,500

So when your on vacation, your devout, you love your faith and church and you happen to be in North Florida or passing through North Florida on vacation... Sunday morning and...

[Ocklawaha]

Guys, I commissioned some sketches (i.e. copied and pasted in Windows Paint) of the before and after changes to our city skyline that would result from the proposed redevelopment plan. Results are below, and they ain't pretty.

Before:


After:


Before:


After:


Before:


After:

These are all views from the river. They look amazing, but visitors or passer-bys don't see these view unfortunately. They are either seeing the downtown views from the Fuller Warren Bridge, or the I-10/I-95 exchange, and unfortunately, the views from those angles are not very pretty. Would be nice if they were to ever do something about that, but unfortunately, this is Jacksonville we're talking about. They will never do anything to make it look appealing. Sad.

Looking at these photos it really does look like shit! Not that it's bad to have buildings on the waterfront, or even that those buildings are rather short and bland, but they are completely blocking a view of the most iconic building in Jacksonville. The Well Fargo Building, Ipso facto is the symbol of Jacksonville.

[mtraininjax]

At this point, with the city finance committee having all city departments cut 2.5% of their budgets and this 11.8 million dollar borrowing package cut, I don't see it happening this year, unless Sleiman pulls the money out of his own coffers. Peter Rummell had a nice editorial in the Sunday Times Union too.

[downtownbrown]

At this point, with the city finance committee having all city departments cut 2.5% of their budgets and this 11.8 million dollar borrowing package cut, I don't see it happening this year, unless Sleiman pulls the money out of his own coffers. Peter Rummell had a nice editorial in the Sunday Times Union too.

Yes, and he made Sleiman and all the advocates for his Landing overhaul (including the TU) look like amateurs.  Given his influence on matters downtown, I think he effectively put the kibosh on the Landing changes until the city undertakes a more formal "programming" process.

[simms3]

^^^I just read his editorial and it's spot on.  The Landing is a community asset, and Sleiman did know that when he took it on.  Multifamily changes that dynamic, for the worse.

I promised pictures of the best comp in the whole country, I think, and I failed to get them this weekend.  Maybe on a lunch break this week.  I'm referring to the Ferry Building here in San Francisco.

There's no other community asset in America with such a similar history, similar location, similar size, and similar potential (reached in the Ferry Building's case).  It's offensive with all of the talent out there in America that has dealt with similar situations and learned from similar experiences that Sleiman hastily grabbed a REIT/multifamily expert from a city who has produced a very diverse array of real estate experts instead of diligently seeking out someone who has more appropriate experience working with such community assets, particularly those that require the programming that I have consistently referred to and that Rummell refers to in his editorial, as well as working with general urban retail/event/public space (i.e. not multi).

I will work hard to get pictures before I rant and say the same thing over again, but anyone on this forum can quickly see what I'm referring to here:

http://www.ferrybuildingmarketplace.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Ferry_Building

Before/After:
http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2012/05/25/then_now_the_history_of_the_ferry_building.php#more

5 yr old article from WSJ discussing Ferry Building copy-cats and why they won't be as succesful (i.e. the Landing CAN be as successful as it has similar ingredients!!!):

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB125856378297053859?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB125856378297053859.html

[KenFSU]

At this point, with the city finance committee having all city departments cut 2.5% of their budgets and this 11.8 million dollar borrowing package cut, I don't see it happening this year, unless Sleiman pulls the money out of his own coffers. Peter Rummell had a nice editorial in the Sunday Times Union too.

Someone might be able to correct me, but I don't think the $11.8 million Landing renovation is necessarily off the table for this fiscal year just yet. From my understanding, we are sitting on approximately $160 million in authorized borrowing from unfinished or shelved/delayed projects from previous years. In the next 30 to 90 days, an audit of these past projects will take place in which the finance committee calculates how much money is still needed for ongoing projects, and which halted projects can potentially be closed out or deauthorized. At that point, whatever cash is left could be applied to Brown's proposed capital improvement projects.

Agree, fantastic op-ed by Peter Rummell on Sunday. For those who didn't get to read it, Rummell's main points were that:

- The Landing's redevelopment will be the catalyst for downtown overall, but we have to get it right.
- The Landing is, first and foremost, a public gathering spot, and proper programming is key to the Landing's success. Without the assurance of quality programming, no public money should be invested.
- In his discussions with Sleiman and in Sleiman's media presentations, he has never heard a single reference to programming.
- The proposed road is a bad idea, and isolates pedestrians from Jacksonville's most valuable asset, the St. Johns River.
- " Racing to abandon the shared public experience of the Landing to develop another set of downtown apartments is unfair to all that consider the Landing their community asset."

[jaxjaguar]

Would any of this funding potentially be used for the public art that's supposed to go in front of the courthouse? I noticed some art in the small park across from the library. Is that permanent?

[Tacachale]

Here's Peter Rummell's letter, by the way. It's spot on.

http://jacksonville.com/business/columnists/2014-09-05/story/guest-column-rummell-suggests-improvements-landing-plan

[downtownbrown]

^^^I just read his editorial and it's spot on.  The Landing is a community asset, and Sleiman did know that when he took it on.  Multifamily changes that dynamic, for the worse.

I promised pictures of the best comp in the whole country, I think, and I failed to get them this weekend.  Maybe on a lunch break this week.  I'm referring to the Ferry Building here in San Francisco.

There's no other community asset in America with such a similar history, similar location, similar size, and similar potential (reached in the Ferry Building's case).  It's offensive with all of the talent out there in America that has dealt with similar situations and learned from similar experiences that Sleiman hastily grabbed a REIT/multifamily expert from a city who has produced a very diverse array of real estate experts instead of diligently seeking out someone who has more appropriate experience working with such community assets, particularly those that require the programming that I have consistently referred to and that Rummell refers to in his editorial, as well as working with general urban retail/event/public space (i.e. not multi).

I will work hard to get pictures before I rant and say the same thing over again, but anyone on this forum can quickly see what I'm referring to here:

http://www.ferrybuildingmarketplace.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Ferry_Building

Before/After:
http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2012/05/25/then_now_the_history_of_the_ferry_building.php#more

5 yr old article from WSJ discussing Ferry Building copy-cats and why they won't be as succesful (i.e. the Landing CAN be as successful as it has similar ingredients!!!):

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB125856378297053859?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB125856378297053859.html

The Ferry Building is magnificent, to be sure.  Across the street is a major convention hotel.  Not too far away is the Mission District, which until recently was pretty sketchy, but now is trendy.  Another good analogue to the Downtown potential.  Aside from that, though, any parallel between SF and Jax is pretty much of a leap.  SF is decidedly urban and urbane.  Jax is suburban and blue collar.  Much of the SF waterfront has been developed for tourism for decades.  Jax, not so much.  It is nice to imagine, however, all of the remaining riverfront industrial sites being gradually converted to tourist/urban enclaves a la SF.  Imagine Tallyrand converting to hotspots beyond the stadium.  Wow.

[simms3]

There is no comparison between SF the city and Jax, but there is a direct comparison between the Ferry Building and the Jacksonville Landing.

Both are the waterfront centerpieces of their respective communities.  Both are similar size and have similar structural components, featuring basically a single main atrium down their lengths with bays that open onto this atrium or outside.  Both have active waterfront uses.  Both are privately owned and operated on public land and seen as community assets.

Also the Ferry Building came first, then the rest of SF's waterfront.  It was the centerpiece needed and a momentum builder.  SF's waterfront is still a major work in progress, btw.  I think the Landing serves as a similar key to unlocking the true potential of downtown Northbank's waterfront potential.

Also, the Hyatt in Jax is as close to the Landing as the Hyatt in SF is close to the Ferry Building, and they are similar size.  Neither really has a definitive bearing on the FB's or Landing's success (because both assets have potential driven by forces far greater than one single convention hotel), but both hotels can augment each asset's success.

Trust me when I say there are really SOOOO many similarities between the FB and the Landing.

RE: The Mission, that's pretty far away and not so much a part of downtown.  All of SF is trendy and expensive now.  No exaggeration.  Manhattan and SF are the only places in the US that are literally at their peaks, in terms of everything (population, wealth, cost, amenities, etc).  Parts of the Mission are still sketchy, but as with most really dense cities, it's corner by corner/street by street.  The Mission is as far from the Ferry Building as Avondale is from downtown.

When I first looked at apts in SF, I wrote off the Mission because it looked like a slum and really rundown and I couldn't figure out why studios were $3K+, but honestly now it's one of the only places in the entire city that has that certain Manhattan true 24 hour activity.  Understanding the city better, I could justify the price to live in the Mission.

[Gamblor]

There is no comparison between SF the city and Jax

Sometimes I like to make comparisons between SF in the 1970s and Jax in the 2010s... 40 years behind sounds about right 

[jake_jax]

We all agree the Jacksonville Landing needs to be re-done but the artist renderings are not that exciting. I did not see boat slips or a marina of any kind, its called a Landing for a reason. Also, the restaurants should be on the water, the view is what sells the Landing. I have no issue with a multi use facility such as residential. But the Landing hosts a slew of events and concerts. It needs to remain and become a vibrant part of the Downtown. They need to have reasons for people in the Westside and Orange Park to make the drive the the Landing. Why not a Jimmy Buffets Margaritaville, or Toby Keiths Bar, a Rainforest Cafe, Blue Martini, Red Robin, a Ice Bar. Things that are not here in North Florida. Jacksonville needs to become a destination. The Landing could become a huge gem for tourism. But it needs a vision. Mavericks is always packed and a nice entertainment venue and so is Fionn McCool's but they need more visual security and better lighting from the Hyatt to the Landing. People need the impression that its a safe place to go. Downtown is on the cusp of something huge in 4 years it will not be the same Downtown. I do believe the Aquarium and the USS Adams will happen as well as the redevelopment of the Shipyards property.

[Charles Hunter]

Rummel letter behind the TU paywall.  Bummer.